on 5/31/05 12:34 PM, Eric Chevalier at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 31 May 2005 09:46:05 -0700, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Gould) wrote: > >> Who? >> >> This is entirely on topic, IMO and worth discussion. > > I believe that Mr. Smith is referring to the messages in this thread which > reminisce about Univac, 7090s, MFT and so forth. The messages which prove > (once again), Jaffe's Conjecture: "Any thread that goes on long enough > will eventually deteriorate into a discussion of 60's and 70's computer > nostalgia". > > http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0103&L=ibm-main&O=D&F=&S=&P=321805 > > And I agree with Mr. Smith that it's time to drop that part of this > thread. > > Eric > -----SNIP-------------------
Eric, The "deteroite" is part and parcel of IBM's history. The history is extremely relevent as it does pertain to the central portion of the original statement (PLO) . The 7090's was not brought up (as I did the bringing up) to unfocus the discussion . It was a background entry only. If you perceived it OT I disagree. It was for background only and was not brought up to distract from the central point. The discussion is coming along fine, IMO. I like to hear about how OEM vendors decide things myself. Each one does it differently as they are the ones that have to deal with "old" equipment types almost everyday. Most (all?) new instructions are carried forward in IBM land. Very few hardware makers can make that type of claim. IBM to its credit does a great job in doing this. Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
